With re-election looming, Putnam polishes conservation bona fides

TALLAHASSEE — Florida conservationists have been searching for years to find a Republican standard-bearer to take some responsibility for defending the Sunshine State's unique natural spaces.

Plenty of Democrats give lip service to protecting the environment, but they have little power in the GOP-dominated Legislature and no seats on the Cabinet.

Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam, now officially seeking a second term, comes from an agricultural pedigree and possesses a deeper knowledge of the state's rural and natural spaces than perhaps any other statewide politician.

His office spearheads energy policy, and he has made Florida's threatened rivers, springs and water bodies a stated top priority.

But his first-term record is an aggregation of political pragmatism and trade-offs so far.

Although he argues water "quality and quantity" are his top priorities, Putnam told the Orlando Sentinel's editorial board Friday that many of Florida rivers are improving — ignoring the deplorable state of the Wekiva and St. Johns rivers.

This year, he backed off his support for Florida's ethanol-at-the-pump law, which mandated that gasoline contain 10 percent ethanol. Gov. Rick Scott on June 1 signed HB 4001, repealing the law.

The law mirrored a federal requirement, so the state repeal isn't likely to change anything at the pumps, Putnam said. He added that his shift reflected the sea change in the energy industry as hydraulic-fracturing technology has suddenly made available huge new reserves of previously inaccessible oil and gas.

"Many [investors] have walked away from ethanol projects," Putnam said. "I was less concerned on the message we were sending to the industry, because the industry has already sent a message."

Putnam still opposes near-shore oil production as an "unnecessary debate," given the industry's interests elsewhere. But industry interests can change overnight, as BP's ethanol-plant flirtation in Florida demonstrates.

Another divide between Putnam and environmentalists could emerge over the "water and land conservation" constitutional amendment proposed for the 2014 ballot.

The amendment — financed so far by more than $506,000 from the Trust for Public Land, the Everglades Foundation, Florida Wildlife Federation and others — would dedicate one-third of the state's documentary-stamp-tax revenues from real-estate transactions to protecting water supplies; fish and wildlife habitat; and working farms and ranches.

Those green groups have complained for years that Florida policymakers were shortchanging water-quality and -conservation programs.

This year, the pendulum started swinging back. The Legislature approved $70 million in Everglades cleanup money, $20 million to buy conservation land and $15.5 million for springs projects.

House Speaker Will Weatherford, R-Wesley Chapel, is expected to push for more springs protections next year. And Senate budget chief Joe Negron, a Stuart Republican hoping to lead that chamber in 2016, wants to beef up Everglades funding.

Amendment backers say far more money is required to reverse the rapid decline of water sources. State economists have said the amendment would generate $648 million in 2015, climbing to nearly $1.3 billion annually by 2035, when the act would sunset.

But Putnam isn't a fan of the constitutional question, calling it an "overreach."

"I want to make sure the state does a better job of taking care of what it buys," he said.

It will be up to people such as Putnam, Weatherford and Negron to suggest a viable alternative if they decide to wage a ballot war against Florida's environmental community.